Strauss-Kahn and the End of the Presumption of Innocence: View

July 1 (Bloomberg) -- A Manhattan judge’s decision to
release Dominique Strauss-Kahn from house arrest tells us
nothing about his guilt or innocence in the affair that landed
him in court in the first place. For the moment, at least,
prosecutors appear determined to press forward with the very
serious charges of attempted rape and sexual assault.

Yet they have also acknowledged embarrassing problems
regarding the credibility of the hotel housekeeper who in May
accused the International Monetary Fund managing director of a
brutal sexual attack.

Although we cannot know how the case will be resolved,
there may be a few lessons to draw from the stunning -- if
inconclusive -- turn in the case. At the very least, we should
consider whether, as a society, we have lost touch with a
fundamental concept of our judicial system: the presumption of
innocence.

High-profile cases take on a life of their own as both
prosecution and defense build narratives to suit their purposes.
This duel is appropriate when presented to a judge and jury. It
can be nefarious when it reverberates in the media echo chamber
outside the courtroom. Reputations and lives are destroyed long
before facts are known.

In the Strauss-Kahn case, a dominant narrative was
established immediately: A powerful man had allegedly assaulted
a helpless housekeeper, a refugee from violence and oppression
in her native Guinea. The story of a Goliath getting his
comeuppance acquired visual force when a haggard and disheveled
Strauss-Kahn was paraded before cameras during the uniquely
American shaming ritual known as the “perp walk.” It was
fortified by accounts from other women, who described a history
of deregulated sexual appetites.

Now, another narrative is emerging to replace the first,
with the disclosure by the prosecution of discrepancies in the
victim’s statements, including misrepresentations about her
background, and of her connection to a jailed man with whom she
allegedly discussed how she might benefit from the case.

The modern mind abhors uncertainty. These revelations
create a narrative vacuum into which the baying know-it-alls
will undoubtedly rush, if only to fill airtime. It will be easy
to substitute the victim for the accused, but what may get lost
in that U-turn is a fundamental fact: We do not yet know what
occurred in that hotel room. It is possible to be both a
dishonest immigrant and a victim of sexual assault. It is
possible to be both a powerful politician and a victim of false
charges.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn deserves the presumption of
innocence. So, too, does his accuser.